Dudeacus97 wrote:*I haven't read it, but I heard it had Christian undertones from an article.
You mean the Lord of the Rings? Tolkien was somewhat similar to Lewis in that he was abundantly well-informed about myths and legends. Tolkien was, I believe, Catholic, and his works certainly do carry a certain strong influence from his religion. However, I'd say that Tolkien is a bit more subtle. The world he created has definite Christian undertones, especially in its concept of creation and the creation's rebellion against the Lord, but it mixes in quite a few different traditions as well. One can sense the rather potent influence of paganism, especially of Norse mythology and a more Germanic sort of nature based religion in some places. One might say that the difference between Lewis and Tolkien is that the former produced Christian allegory in the form of a number of rather mythical books while the latter worked towards creating his own mythology from his vast knowledge of existing traditions. Both are quite good, though, personally, I tend to prefer Tolkien's fiction over Lewis'. Lewis in his nonfiction, however, especially when he is at his most pithy in some of his short essays, is really hard to match. See my signature for another great mind on the subject of Christianity.
"Pithy". Good word to describe him. I personally prefer much of Lewis' fiction to Tolkien's, because Lewis is more allegorical to Christian themes (and meant to make it so), and he is easier to read in general. It's quite easy to get lost in LOTR if one doesn't pay attention. But children and even those with little theological knowledge or thought can understand what Lewis says in Narnia. I will be reading more of Lewis' nonfiction soon, and will tackle "The Pilgrim's Regress" and "Till We Have Faces". I fully look forward to it even if my brain gets "poached".
Callisto wrote:"Pithy". Good word to describe him. I personally prefer much of Lewis' fiction to Tolkien's, because Lewis is more allegorical to Christian themes (and meant to make it so), and he is easier to read in general. It's quite easy to get lost in LOTR if one doesn't pay attention. But children and even those with little theological knowledge or thought can understand what Lewis says in Narnia. I will be reading more of Lewis' nonfiction soon, and will tackle "The Pilgrim's Regress" and "Till We Have Faces". I fully look forward to it even if my brain gets "poached".
Yes, Lewis tends to be a bit more clear and has a stronger Christian feel to his work, but I think that is because with Tolkien his fiction is as much a scholarly endeavor as a creative one. He takes his knowledge of myths and legends (and languages of course) and puts it to use creating an entire mythos of his own. It's quite fascinating, if for no other reason than that it took such an inordinate amount of his time and thought to do it. He might have benefitted from a few editors, though. His son is still sorting through his material to make sense of some of it.
“The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and left untried.” -G.K. Chesterton
I personally prefer much of Lewis' fiction to Tolkien's, because Lewis is more allegorical to Christian themes (and meant to make it so), and he is easier to read in general. It's quite easy to get lost in LOTR if one doesn't pay attention. But children and even those with little theological knowledge or thought can understand what Lewis says in Narnia. I will be reading more of Lewis' nonfiction soon, and will tackle "The Pilgrim's Regress" and "Till We Have Faces". I fully look forward to it even if my brain gets "poached". 